Refine
Document Type
- Article (14)
Has Fulltext
- yes (14)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (14)
Keywords
- Magnetic resonance imaging (14) (remove)
Institute
- Medizin (13)
- Psychologie (2)
Correlation of lumbar lateral recess stenosis in magnetic resonance imaging and clinical symptoms
(2017)
Aim: To assess the correlation of lateral recess stenosis (LRS) of lumbar segments L4/5 and L5/S1 and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI).
Methods: Nine hundred and twenty-seven patients with history of low back pain were included in this uncontrolled study. On magnetic resonance images (MRI) the lateral recesses (LR) at lumbar levels L4/5 and L5/S1 were evaluated and each nerve root was classified into a 4-point grading scale (Grade 0-3) as normal, not deviated, deviated or compressed. Patient symptoms and disability were assessed using ODI. The Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient was used for statistical analysis (P < 0.05).
Results: Approximately half of the LR revealed stenosis (grade 1-3; 52% at level L4/5 and 42% at level L5/S1) with 2.2% and 1.9% respectively reveal a nerve root compression. The ODI score ranged from 0%-91.11% with an arithmetic mean of 34.06% ± 16.89%. We observed a very weak statistically significant positive correlation between ODI and LRS at lumbar levels L4/5 and L5/S1, each bilaterally (L4/5 left: rho < 0.105, P < 0.01; L4/5 right: rho < 0.111, P < 0.01; L5/S1 left: rho 0.128, P < 0.01; L5/S1 right: rho < 0.157, P < 0.001).
Conclusion: Although MRI is the standard imaging tool for diagnosing lumbar spinal stenosis, this study showed only a weak correlation of LRS on MRI and clinical findings. This can be attributed to a number of reasons outlined in this study, underlining that imaging findings alone are not sufficient to establish a reliable diagnosis for patients with LRS.
Objectives: To compare dual-energy CT (DECT) and MRI for assessing presence and extent of traumatic bone marrow edema (BME) and fracture line depiction in acute vertebral fractures. Methods: Eighty-eight consecutive patients who underwent dual-source DECT and 3-T MRI of the spine were retrospectively analyzed. Five radiologists assessed all vertebrae for presence and extent of BME and for identification of acute fracture lines on MRI and, after 12 weeks, on DECT series. Additionally, image quality, image noise, and diagnostic confidence for overall diagnosis of acute vertebral fracture were assessed. Quantitative analysis of CT numbers was performed by a sixth radiologist. Two radiologists analyzed MRI and grayscale DECT series to define the reference standard. Results: For assessing BME presence and extent, DECT showed high sensitivity (89% and 84%, respectively) and specificity (98% in both), and similarly high diagnostic confidence compared to MRI (2.30 vs. 2.32; range 0–3) for the detection of BME (p = .72). For evaluating acute fracture lines, MRI achieved high specificity (95%), moderate sensitivity (76%), and a significantly lower diagnostic confidence compared to DECT (2.42 vs. 2.62, range 0–3) (p < .001). A cutoff value of − 0.43 HU provided a sensitivity of 89% and a specificity of 90% for diagnosing BME, with an overall AUC of 0.96. Conclusions: DECT and MRI provide high diagnostic confidence and image quality for assessing acute vertebral fractures. While DECT achieved high overall diagnostic accuracy in the analysis of BME presence and extent, MRI provided moderate sensitivity and lower confidence for evaluating fracture lines.
22q11.2 Deletion Syndrome (22q11.2DS) is the most common microdeletion in humans, with a heterogenous clinical presentation including medical, behavioural and psychiatric conditions. Previous neuroimaging studies examining the neuroanatomical underpinnings of 22q11.2DS show alterations in cortical volume (CV), cortical thickness (CT) and surface area (SA). The aim of this study was to identify (1) the spatially distributed networks of differences in CT and SA in 22q11.2DS compared to controls, (2) their unique and spatial overlap, as well as (3) their relative contribution to observed differences in CV. Structural MRI scans were obtained from 62 individuals with 22q11.2DS and 57 age-and-gender-matched controls (aged 6–31). Using FreeSurfer, we examined differences in vertex-wise estimates of CV, CT and SA at each vertex, and compared the frequencies of vertices with a unique or overlapping difference for each morphometric feature. Our findings indicate that CT and SA make both common and unique contributions to volumetric differences in 22q11.2DS, and in some areas, their strong opposite effects mask differences in CV. By identifying the neuroanatomic variability in 22q11.2DS, and the separate contributions of CT and SA, we can start exploring the shared and distinct mechanisms that mediate neuropsychiatric symptoms across disorders, e.g. 22q11.2DS-related ASD and/or psychosis/schizophrenia.
Purpose: The aim of this study was to prospectively compare the therapy response and safety of microwave (MWA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for the treatment of liver metastases using a dual ablation system.
Methods: Fifty patients with liver metastases (23 men, mean age: 62.8 ± 11.8 years) were randomly assigned to MWA or RFA for thermal ablation using a one generator dual ablation system. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was acquired before treatment and 24 h post ablation. The morphologic responses to treatment regarding size, volume, necrotic areas, and diffusion characteristics were evaluated by MRI. Imaging follow-up was obtained for one year in three months intervals, whereas clinical follow-up was obtained for two years in all patients.
Results: Twenty-six patients received MWA and 24 patients received RFA (mean diameter: 1.6 cm, MWA: 1.7 cm, RFA: 1.5 cm). The mean volume 24 h after ablation was 37.0 cm3 (MWA: 50.5 cm3, RFA: 22.9 cm3, P < 0.01). The local recurrence rate was 0% (0/26) in the MWA-group and 8.3% (2/24) in the RFA-group (P = 0.09). The rate of newly developed malignant formations was 38.0% (19/50) for both groups (MWA: 38.4%, RFA: 37.5%, P = 0.07). The overall survival rate was 70.0% (35/50) after two years (MWA: 76.9%, RFA: 62.5%, P = 0.60). No major complications were reported.
Conclusion: In conclusion, MWA and RFA are both safe and effective methods for the treatment of liver metastases with MWA generating greater volumes of ablation. No significant differences were found for overall survival, rate of neoplasm, or major complications between both groups.